Moderator: Cartographers


im not sure what your talking about, the only continents surrounded on all borders is the gate, and throne. I think there is good playability, i couldn't quite understand the 'exapnd from the throne' comment. are you saying it is difficult, or it isnt.Marvaddin wrote:I really dislike this idea until now.
Beyond the lack of appeal Im feeling, the playability looks simply terrible. Almost all "continents" have all their territories as border ones, it just doesnt happen to the Tunnel (which is completely linear), and to Forest and Plains. All other continents have all territories in their borders. Look, for example, how is difficult to expand from the throne, the castle is simply wasted: except for the throne, the gate and the outer wall, all continents are useless (even these ones are only holdable due to tiny number of territories).
yeah, i'll just build a castle in my backyard and cultivate a prairie, swamp and forest, so i can take some pictures and then the map will be photorealistic enough for CC. And its not a castle, its a castle-type. If it were a castle i'd put catapults and seige towers and wizards and maidens dangling their hair from a high window, and whatever else you think belongs in a castle. but its not castle, its a castle-lite. judging from your own Triassic map i'll largely ingore your graphic sensibilities.Marvaddin wrote: In fact, the visual is also not good. For the external lands, just the forest has good textures. The swamp doesnt seem a swamp, and the plains looks like a desert. But much worse is the castle. It looks like a hat. What castle would use a stupid design like that? Plus, where are the towers? Where are the siege machines (catapults, siege towers, etc)? Graphics are not helping the appeal.
i dont think the castle is weaker than the surrounding lands at all. the gate and throne are the easiest bonuses to get. once you have the throne, the great hall shouldnt be too hard. and the outer wall are only 1 territory per side, and only attackable from 2 territories on the outside, while they can attack 6 +gate.Marvaddin wrote: Anyway, do this seem a siege to you? For a siege, I would think:
- castle is weaker than the surrounding lands (but I dont know if this is happening, because the castle have the small bonuses, like 2 armies for the throne, 2 territories, and the gate, that you can start with; only the forest seems a threat after you get the castle, assuming its possible).
- castle should be easier to defend; but, at other hand, should give almost no troop bonus, due to the siege.
yes i was thinking of the camp idea, it may happen.Marvaddin wrote: So, I think the castle should make possible an easier expansion from the throne (possibly), instead of being a no man land, but giving smaller bonuses. The surrounding lands would need some more well designed continents, to make sure someone could acumulate troops out of the castle too... Maybe we could have a camp in SE and another one in SW.
a catapult would be a good idea if it didnt allow for the dumping of armies inside the castle, which is exactly what would happen.Marvaddin wrote: Instead of the small bridges, you could add catapults. So from more distant territories, invaders could attack the wall. Plus, the castle would have as exits just the gate and the tunnel (that of course is related to the castle), because its under siege.
thanks, the graphics are fine in my opinion, the plability may need some tweaking tho.Marvaddin wrote: Some ideas you can think about

Really? I would like if you could tell me what territories of the Great hall (and Inner Wall, and East Ward, and Outer Wall, Midlands and Swamp) are non borders ones... And the comment obviously said it was difficult to expand (ok, its easier with the stairs). Anyway, good playability??mibi wrote: im not sure what your talking about, the only continents surrounded on all borders is the gate, and throne. I think there is good playability, i couldn't quite understand the 'exapnd from the throne' comment. are you saying it is difficult, or it isnt.
Feeling bad, darling? Haha, if you cant do it better, you can just admit it, I have no use for your jokes. Sure, I have limited graphics skills, but looks like you also have the same problem... Any comments to my map, use the proper thread, babyyeah, i'll just build a castle in my backyard and cultivate a prairie, swamp and forest, so i can take some pictures and then the map will be photorealistic enough for CC. And its not a castle, its a castle-type. If it were a castle i'd put catapults and seige towers and wizards and maidens dangling their hair from a high window, and whatever else you think belongs in a castle. but its not castle, its a castle-lite. judging from your own Triassic map i'll largely ingore your graphic sensibilities.
Read again what you just wrote and feel the lack of balance. I was not saying the castle was too weak, because I see the easy bonuses. But who would siege a castle that is stronger than the invaders? In a normal siege, the castle would be weaker than the invaders, dont you agree? I think the castle having 7 bonuses, some of them very easy, while the outside has 5 bonuses (including the tunnel, but this one should be counted for the castle), and most of them difficult, its no good. Now, the castle is even more stronger, with the stairs. How about redesign the map adding more territories to outside, and with a smaller castle?i dont think the castle is weaker than the surrounding lands at all. the gate and throne are the easiest bonuses to get. once you have the throne, the great hall shouldnt be too hard. and the outer wall are only 1 territory per side, and only attackable from 2 territories on the outside, while they can attack 6 +gate.
on the outside, the forrest is the only bonus thats relatively easy to get. so i think its pretty balanced.
I still think we could have a easy to take and defend castle, but hard to expand. And the catapults could be an interesting idea to attack the walls... Offensive catapults only, I was suggesting... Or we can think about archers too.a catapult would be a good idea if it didnt allow for the dumping of armies inside the castle, which is exactly what would happen.

qwert wrote:Can i ask you something?What is porpose for you to open these Political topic in ConquerClub? Why you mix politic with Risk? Why you not open topic like HOT AND SEXY,or something like that.

qwert wrote:Can i ask you something?What is porpose for you to open these Political topic in ConquerClub? Why you mix politic with Risk? Why you not open topic like HOT AND SEXY,or something like that.
the only problem with this is that everyone who starts in the tunnel would have to dump out intot he great hall, which might be interesting but would certainly make the great hall and throne less defendable.Guiscard wrote: Just a couple of thoughts... Just putting it out there for consideration but what if the tunnel was one way between swamp 4 and tunnel 5 (swamp>tunnel). This would eliminate a border for the swamp (which is all borders at the moment) but the tunnel would still be holdable by anyone, plus it would be a bit more realisitc. Tunnels are dug under castle walls to attack, not defend.



Yeah, I don't know what happened, it would be a different world if we all could make maps with the quality of the Middle East map and get them in.mibi wrote:i find it surprising that 80% of the maps on CC even got quenched considering how picky people are about graphics.